Exploration of a Potential DOOR Endpoint for Hospital-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia and Ventilator-Associated Bacterial Pneumonia Using Six Registrational Trials for Antibacterial Drugs

BACKGROUND

Desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) is an innovative approach to clinical trial design and analysis that uses an ordinal ranking system to incorporate the overall risks and benefits of a therapeutic intervention into a single measurement. Here, we derived and evaluated a disease-specific DOOR endpoint for registrational trials for hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia and ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP).

METHODS

Through comprehensive examination of data from nearly 4,000 participants enrolled in six registrational trials for HABP/VABP submitted to the FDA between 2005-2022, we derived and applied a HABP/VABP specific endpoint. We estimated the probability that a participant assigned to the study treatment arm would have a more favorable overall DOOR or component outcome than a participant assigned to comparator.

RESULTS

DOOR distributions between treatment arms were similar in all trials. DOOR probability estimates ranged from 48.3% to 52.9% and were not statistically different. There were no significant differences between treatment arms in the component analyses. Though infectious complications and serious adverse events occurred more frequently in ventilated participants compared to non-ventilated participants, the types of events were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Through a data-driven approach, we constructed and applied a potential DOOR endpoint for HABP/VABP trials. The inclusion of syndrome-specific events may help to better delineate and evaluate participant experiences and outcomes in future HABP/VABP trials and could help inform data collection and trial design.

Moving Beyond Mortality: Development and Application of a Desirability of Outcome Ranking (DOOR) Endpoint for Hospital-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia and Ventilator-Associated Bacterial Pneumonia

BACKGROUND

Hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP) are frequently caused by multidrug-resistant organisms. Patient-centered endpoints in clinical trials are needed to develop new antibiotics for HABP/VABP. Desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) is a paradigm for the design, analysis, and interpretation of clinical trials based on a patient-centered, benefit-risk evaluation.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary committee created an infectious diseases DOOR endpoint customized for HABP/VABP, incorporating infectious complications, serious adverse events, and mortality. We applied this to 2 previously completed, large randomized controlled trials for HABP/VABP. ZEPHyR compared vancomycin to linezolid and VITAL compared linezolid to tedizolid. For each trial, we evaluated the DOOR distribution and probability, including DOOR component and partial credit analyses. We also applied DOOR in subgroup analyses.

RESULTS

In both trials, the HABP/VABP DOOR demonstrated similar overall clinical outcomes between treatment groups. In ZEPHyR, the probability that a participant treated with linezolid would have a more desirable outcome than a participant treated with vancomycin was 50.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 45.1%--55.3%). In VITAL, the probability that a participant treated with tedizolid would have a more desirable outcome than a participant treated with linezolid was 48.7% (95% CI, 44.8%-52.6%). The DOOR component analysis revealed that participants treated with tedizolid had a less desirable outcome than those treated with linezolid when considering clinical response alone. However, participants with decreased renal function had improved overall outcomes with tedizolid.

CONCLUSIONS

The HABP/VABP DOOR provided more granular information about clinical outcomes than is typically presented in clinical trials. HABP/VABP trials would benefit from prospectively using DOOR.

The Future Ain't What It Used to Be…Out With the Old…In With the Better: Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group Innovations

Clinical research networks conduct important studies that would not otherwise be performed by other entities. In the case of the Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group (ARLG), such studies include diagnostic studies using master protocols, controlled phage intervention trials, and studies that evaluate treatment strategies or dynamic interventions, such as sequences of empiric and definitive therapies. However, the value of a clinical research network lies not only in the results from these important studies but in the creation of new approaches derived from collaborative thinking, carefully examining and defining the most important research questions for clinical practice, recognizing and addressing common but suboptimal approaches, and anticipating that the standard approaches of today may be insufficient for tomorrow. This results in the development and implementation of new methodologies and tools for the design, conduct, analyses, and reporting of research studies. These new methodologies directly impact the studies conducted within the network and have a broad and long-lasting impact on the field, enhancing the scientific value and efficiency of generations of research studies. This article describes innovations from the ARLG in diagnostic studies, observational studies, and clinical trials evaluating interventions for the prevention and treatment of antibiotic-resistant bacterial infections.

Priorities and Progress in Gram-positive Bacterial Infection Research by the Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group: A Narrative Review

The Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group (ARLG) has prioritized infections caused by gram-positive bacteria as one of its core areas of emphasis. The ARLG Gram-positive Committee has focused on studies responding to 3 main identified research priorities: (1) investigation of strategies or therapies for infections predominantly caused by gram-positive bacteria, (2) evaluation of the efficacy of novel agents for infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant enterococci, and (3) optimization of dosing and duration of antimicrobial agents for gram-positive infections. Herein, we summarize ARLG accomplishments in gram-positive bacterial infection research, including studies aiming to (1) inform optimal vancomycin dosing, (2) determine the role of dalbavancin in MRSA bloodstream infection, (3) characterize enterococcal bloodstream infections, (4) demonstrate the benefits of short-course therapy for pediatric community-acquired pneumonia, (5) develop quality of life measures for use in clinical trials, and (6) advance understanding of the microbiome. Future studies will incorporate innovative methodologies with a focus on interventional clinical trials that have the potential to change clinical practice for difficult-to-treat infections, such as MRSA bloodstream infections.

Ceftobiprole for Treatment of Complicated Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia

BACKGROUND

Ceftobiprole is a cephalosporin that may be effective for treating complicated Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia, including methicillin-resistant S. aureus.

METHODS

In this phase 3, double-blind, double-dummy, noninferiority trial, adults with complicated S. aureus bacteremia were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive ceftobiprole at a dose of 500 mg intravenously every 6 hours for 8 days and every 8 hours thereafter, or daptomycin at a dose of 6 to 10 mg per kilogram of body weight intravenously every 24 hours plus optional aztreonam (at the discretion of the trial-site investigators). The primary outcome, overall treatment success 70 days after randomization (defined as survival, bacteremia clearance, symptom improvement, no new S. aureus bacteremia-related complications, and no receipt of other potentially effective antibiotics), with a noninferiority margin of 15%, was adjudicated by a data review committee whose members were unaware of the trial-group assignments. Safety was also assessed.

RESULTS

Of 390 patients who underwent randomization, 387 (189 in the ceftobiprole group and 198 in the daptomycin group) had confirmed S. aureus bacteremia and received ceftobiprole or daptomycin (modified intention-to-treat population). A total of 132 of 189 patients (69.8%) in the ceftobiprole group and 136 of 198 patients (68.7%) in the daptomycin group had overall treatment success (adjusted difference, 2.0 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -7.1 to 11.1). Findings appeared to be consistent between the ceftobiprole and daptomycin groups in key subgroups and with respect to secondary outcomes, including mortality (9.0% and 9.1%, respectively; 95% CI, -6.2 to 5.2) and the percentage of patients with microbiologic eradication (82.0% and 77.3%; 95% CI, -2.9 to 13.0). Adverse events were reported in 121 of 191 patients (63.4%) who received ceftobiprole and 117 of 198 patients (59.1%) who received daptomycin; serious adverse events were reported in 36 patients (18.8%) and 45 patients (22.7%), respectively. Gastrointestinal adverse events (primarily mild nausea) were more frequent with ceftobiprole.

CONCLUSIONS

Ceftobiprole was noninferior to daptomycin with respect to overall treatment success in patients with complicated S. aureus bacteremia. (Funded by Basilea Pharmaceutica International and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; ERADICATE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03138733.).

Exploration of a Potential Desirability of Outcome Ranking Endpoint for Complicated Intra-Abdominal Infections Using 9 Registrational Trials for Antibacterial Drugs

BACKGROUND

Desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) is a novel approach to clinical trial design that incorporates safety and efficacy assessments into an ordinal ranking system to evaluate overall outcomes of clinical trial participants. Here, we derived and applied a disease-specific DOOR endpoint to registrational trials for complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI).

METHODS

Initially, we applied an a priori DOOR prototype to electronic patient-level data from 9 phase 3 noninferiority trials for cIAI submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration between 2005 and 2019. We derived a cIAI-specific DOOR endpoint based on clinically meaningful events that trial participants experienced. Next, we applied the cIAI-specific DOOR endpoint to the same datasets and, for each trial, estimated the probability that a participant assigned to the study treatment would have a more desirable DOOR or component outcome than if assigned to the comparator.

RESULTS

Three key findings informed the cIAI-specific DOOR endpoint: (1) a significant proportion of participants underwent additional surgical procedures related to their baseline infection; (2) infectious complications of cIAI were diverse; and (3) participants with worse outcomes experienced more infectious complications, more serious adverse events, and underwent more procedures. DOOR distributions between treatment arms were similar in all trials. DOOR probability estimates ranged from 47.4% to 50.3% and were not significantly different. Component analyses depicted risk-benefit assessments of study treatment versus comparator.

CONCLUSIONS

We designed and evaluated a potential DOOR endpoint for cIAI trials to further characterize overall clinical experiences of participants. Similar data-driven approaches can be utilized to create other infectious disease-specific DOOR endpoints.

Improving Traditional Registrational Trial End Points: Development and Application of a Desirability of Outcome Ranking End Point for Complicated Urinary Tract Infection Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

Traditional end points used in registrational randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) often do not allow for complete interpretation of the full range of potential clinical outcomes. Desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) is an approach to the design and analysis of clinical trials that incorporates benefits and risks of novel treatment strategies and provides a global assessment of patient experience.

METHODS

Through a multidisciplinary committee of experts in infectious diseases, clinical trial design, drug regulation, and patient experience, we developed a DOOR end point for infectious disease syndromes and demonstrated how this could be applied to 3 registrational drug trials (ZEUS, APEKS-cUTI, and DORI-05) for complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs). ZEUS compared fosfomycin to piperacillin/tazobactam, APEKS-cUTI compared cefiderocol to imipenem, and DORI-05 compared doripenem to levofloxacin. Using DOOR, we estimated the probability of a more desirable outcome with each investigational antibacterial drug.

RESULTS

In each RCT, the DOOR distribution was similar and the probability that a patient in the investigational arm would have a more desirable outcome than a patient in the control arm had a 95% confidence interval containing 50%, indicating no significant difference between treatment arms. DOOR facilitated improved understanding of potential trade-offs between clinical efficacy and safety. Partial credit and subgroup analyses also highlight unique attributes of DOOR.

CONCLUSIONS

DOOR can effectively be used in registrational cUTI trials. The DOOR end point presented here can be adapted for other infectious disease syndromes and prospectively incorporated into future clinical trials.

Characterization of a Novel Pathogen in Immunocompromised Patients: Elizabethkingia anophelis-Exploring the Scope of Resistance to Contemporary Antimicrobial Agents and β-lactamase Inhibitors

Background

Elizabethkingia anophelis is an emerging Gram-negative nonlactose fermenter in the health care setting, where it causes life-threatening infections in immunocompromised patients. We aimed to characterize the molecular mechanisms of antimicrobial resistance and evaluate the utility of contemporary antibiotics with the intent to offer targeted therapy against an uncommonly encountered pathogen.

Methods

Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) was conducted to accurately identify isolate species and elucidate the determinants of β-lactam resistance. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed using broth microdilution and disk diffusion assays. To assess the functional contribution of the major metallo-β-lactamase (MBL) encoding genes to the resistance profile, bla _BlaB was cloned into pBCSK(-) phagemid vector and transformed into Escherichia coli DH10B.

Results

WGS identified the organism as E. anophelis. MBL genes bla _BlaB-1 and bla _GOB-26 were identified, in addition to bla _CME-2, which encodes for an extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL). Plasmids were not detected. The isolate was nonsusceptible to all commonly available β-lactams, carbapenems, newer β-lactam β-lactamase inhibitor combinations, and to the combination of aztreonam (ATM) with ceftazidime-avibactam (CAZ-AVI). Susceptibility to the novel siderophore cephalosporin cefiderocol was determined. A BlaB-1 transformant E. coli DH10B isolate was obtained and demonstrated increased minimum inhibitory concentrations to cephalosporins, carbapenems, and CAZ-AVI, but not ATM.

Conclusions

Using WGS, we accurately identified and characterized an extensively drug-resistant E. anophelis in an immunocompromised patient. Rapid evaluation of the genetic background can guide accurate susceptibility testing to better inform antimicrobial therapy selection.

Sulopenem or Ciprofloxacin for the Treatment of Uncomplicated Urinary Tract Infections in Women: A Phase 3, Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

There are limited treatment options for uncomplicated urinary tract infection (uUTI) caused by resistant pathogens. Sulopenem etzadroxil/probenecid (sulopenem) is an oral thiopenem antibiotic active against multidrug-resistant pathogens that cause uUTIs.

METHODS

Patients with uUTI were randomized to 5 days of sulopenem or 3 days of ciprofloxacin. The primary endpoint was overall success, defined as both clinical and microbiologic response at day 12. In patients with ciprofloxacin-nonsusceptible baseline pathogens, sulopenem was compared for superiority over ciprofloxacin; in patients with ciprofloxacin-susceptible pathogens, the agents were compared for noninferiority. Using prespecified hierarchical statistical testing, the primary endpoint was tested in the combined population if either superiority or noninferiority was declared in the nonsusceptible or susceptible population, respectively.

RESULTS

In the nonsusceptible population, sulopenem was superior to ciprofloxacin, 62.6% vs 36.0% (difference, 26.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 15.1 to 7.4; P <.001). In the susceptible population, sulopenem was not noninferior to ciprofloxacin, 66.8% vs 78.6% (difference, -11.8%; 95% CI, -18.0 to 5.6). The difference was driven by a higher rate of asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB) post-treatment in patients on sulopenem. In the combined analysis, sulopenem was noninferior to ciprofloxacin, 65.6% vs 67.9% (difference, -2.3%; 95% CI, -7.9 to 3.3). Diarrhea occurred more frequently with sulopenem (12.4% vs 2.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Sulopenem was noninferior to ciprofloxacin in the treatment of uUTIs. Sulopenem was superior to ciprofloxacin in patients with uUTIs due to ciprofloxacin-nonsusceptible pathogens. Sulopenem was not noninferior in patients with ciprofloxacin-susceptible pathogens, driven largely by a lower rate of ASB in those who received ciprofloxacin.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03354598.

223. Development and Analysis of a Novel DOOR Endpoint for Complicated Intra-abdominal Infections (cIAI) Using 10 Registrational Trials for Antibacterial Drugs

Background

Desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) uses an ordinal ranking system to evaluate global outcomes in clinical trial participants by incorporating safety and efficacy assessments into a single endpoint. In this study, we developed and applied a DOOR endpoint for cIAI clinical trials.

Methods

We reviewed 10 Phase 3 noninferiority trials for cIAI with electronic patient-level data (n=5473 participants) submitted to the FDA between 2005-2021. Extending previous work [CID. 2019:68(10):1691-8)], we developed an expanded cIAI-specific DOOR endpoint based on clinically meaningful events captured in trial datasets and those that were unique to patients with cIAI. Using this DOOR endpoint, we assigned each participant a DOOR rank, estimated the probability that a participant in the study treatment arm in each trial would have a more desirable DOOR rank than if assigned to the comparator arm, and analyzed individual components of clinical experience in each trial.

Results

Based on analysis of available data, we noted heterogeneity in definitions of “indeterminate” clinical outcomes, and significant diversity and increased incidence of infectious complications (ICs), serious adverse events (SAEs), and surgical/percutaneous procedures in participants without clinical cure. These informed the expansion of the DOOR endpoint for cIAI to include clinical efficacy outcomes, ICs, SAEs, and additional procedures (Table 1). The DOOR distributions between treatment and comparator arms in all 10 trials were similar. DOOR probability estimates for the 10 trials ranged from 44.5% to 50.3% but were not nominally statistically significant. Component analyses in two trials showed that the study treatment was nominally statistically inferior to the comparator with regard to SAEs and clinical failure, respectively (Fig. 1b, 1c). Table 1.

652. Ceftazidime-avibactam Alone or as Combination Therapy? Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Analysis of Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative Infection

Background

Ceftazidime-avibactam (caz-avi), a novel β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor, is commonly utilized for carbapenem-resistant gram-negative infections (CR-GNI). However, the benefits vs risks of combining caz-avi with other agents are unclear.

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study, inpatients with CR-GNI treated with caz-avi were identified at 9 U.S. hospitals. The impact of caz-avi monotherapy (MT) or combination therapy (CT; i.e., any concomitant use of gram-negative-active antibiotics) was studied using logistic regression, controlling for baseline patient and hospital factors. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality or discharge to hospice (death), and secondary outcomes were length of stay (LOS), resolution of infectious signs and symptoms (clinical response), 90-day recurrent infection and future caz-avi–resistant organism. An adjusted odds ratio (aOR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was used to assess the primary and secondary outcomes.

Results

328/499 (65.7%) patients received caz-avi as targeted therapy for a CR-GNI. Overall patients treated with MT and CT were similar at baseline and had comparable baseline demographics although patients treated with CT were more likely to be in the ICU and receive a concomitant empiric in vitro-concordant antibiotic (table 1). The most common organism was Klebsiella spp. (44.6%) followed by Pseudomonas aeruginosa (27.7%) (table 2). Concomitant gram-negative agents are shown in table 3. Overall, 92 (28.1%) patients died and CT (vs MT) displayed similar adjusted mortality risk (27.7% vs 28.7%; aOR [95%CI]: 0.67 [0.34-1.33]) and LOS (19 [9, 37] and 20 [9, 42.5] days). CT (vs MT) was associated with greater odds of clinical response (aOR: 2.25 [95%CI:1.15-4.41]). Among survivors, similar rates of 90-day recurrent infection (50/154 (32.5%) were observed in CT vs 18/82 (22.0%) in MT group (p=0.09) and 5 (2.19%) patients had future infection with a caz-avi–resistant pathogen (3 in CT and 2 in MT group).

Conclusion

Compared to patients with CR-GNI treated with caz-avi alone, those who received CT including caz-avy had similar survival and LOS but higher clinical response. The role of CT in the era of novel antibiotics warrants additional study.

Disclosures

Helen W. Boucher, MD, American Society of Microbiology: Honoraria|Elsevier: Honoraria|Sanford Guide: Honoraria.

A Desirability of Outcome Ranking Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Seven Versus Fourteen Days of Antibiotics for Uncomplicated Gram-Negative Bloodstream Infection

Background

Although a short course (7 days) of antibiotics has been demonstrated to be noninferior to a conventional course (14 days) in terms of mortality and infectious complications for patients with a Gram-negative bacterial bloodstream infection (GNB), it is unknown whether a shorter treatment duration can provide a better overall clinical outcome.

Methods

We applied a bloodstream infection-specific desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) analysis to the results of a previously completed, randomized controlled trial comparing short versus conventional course antibiotic therapy for hospitalized patients with uncomplicated GNB. We determined the probability that a randomly selected participant in the short course group would have a more desirable overall outcome than a participant in the conventional duration group. We performed (1) partial credit analyses allowing for calculated and variable weighting of DOOR ranks and (2) subgroup analyses to elucidate which patients may benefit the most from short durations of therapy.

Results

For the 604 patients included in the original study (306 short course, 298 conventional course), the probability of having a more desirable outcome with a short course of antibiotics compared with a conventional course was 51.1% (95% confidence interval, 46.7% to 55.4%), indicating no significant difference. Partial credit analyses indicated that the DOOR results were similar across different patient preferences. Prespecified subgroup analyses using DOOR did not reveal significant differences between short and conventional courses of therapy.

Conclusions

Both short and conventional durations of antibiotic therapy provide comparable clinical outcomes when using DOOR to consider benefits and risks of treatment options for GNB.

Weekly SARS-CoV-2 screening of asymptomatic kindergarten to grade 12 students and staff helps inform strategies for safer in-person learning

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission in K-12 schools was rare during in 2020-2021; few studies included Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)-recommended screening of asymptomatic individuals. We conduct a prospective observational study of SARS-CoV-2 screening in a mid-sized suburban public school district to evaluate the incidence of asymptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), document frequency of in-school transmission, and characterize barriers and facilitators to asymptomatic screening in schools. Staff and students undergo weekly pooled testing using home-collected saliva samples. Identification of >1 case in a school prompts investigation for in-school transmission and enhancement of safety strategies. With layered mitigation measures, in-school transmission even before student or staff vaccination is rare. Screening identifies a single cluster with in-school staff-to-staff transmission, informing decisions about in-person learning. The proportion of survey respondents self-reporting comfort with in-person learning before versus after implementation of screening increases. Costs exceed $260,000 for assays alone; staff and volunteers spend 135-145 h per week implementing screening.

Antibiotic resistance in the patient with cancer: Escalating challenges and paths forward

Infection is the second leading cause of death in patients with cancer. Loss of efficacy in antibiotics due to antibiotic resistance in bacteria is an urgent threat against the continuing success of cancer therapy. In this review, the authors focus on recent updates on the impact of antibiotic resistance in the cancer setting, particularly on the ESKAPE pathogens (Enterococcus faecium, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Enterobacter spp.). This review highlights the health and financial impact of antibiotic resistance in patients with cancer. Furthermore, the authors recommend measures to control the emergence of antibiotic resistance, highlighting the risk factors associated with cancer care. A lack of data in the etiology of infections, specifically in oncology patients in United States, is identified as a concern, and the authors advocate for a centralized and specialized surveillance system for patients with cancer to predict and prevent the emergence of antibiotic resistance. Finding better ways to predict, prevent, and treat antibiotic-resistant infections will have a major positive impact on the care of those with cancer.

Factors associated with neutropenia post heart transplantation

BACKGROUND

Neutropenia is a serious complication following heart transplantation (OHT); however, risk factors for its development and its association with outcomes is not well described. We sought to study the prevalence of neutropenia, risk factors associated with its development, and its impact on infection, rejection, and survival.

METHODS

A retrospective single-center analysis of adult OHT recipients from July 2004 to December 2017 was performed. Demographic, laboratory, medication, infection, rejection, and survival data were collected for 1 year post-OHT. Baseline laboratory measurements were collected within the 24 hours before OHT. Neutropenia was defined as absolute neutrophil count ≤1000 cells/mm3. Cox proportional hazards models explored associations with time to first neutropenia. Associations between neutropenia, analyzed as a time-dependent covariate, with secondary outcomes of time to infection, rejection, or death were also examined.

RESULTS

Of 278 OHT recipients, 84 (30%) developed neutropenia at a median of 142 days (range 81-228) after transplant. Factors independently associated with increased risk of neutropenia included lower baseline WBC (HR 1.12; 95% CI 1.11-1.24), pre-OHT ventricular assist device (1.63; 1.00-2.66), high-risk CMV serostatus [donor positive, recipient negative] (1.86; 1.19-2.88), and having a previous CMV infection (4.07; 3.92-13.7).

CONCLUSIONS

Neutropenia is a fairly common occurrence after adult OHT. CMV infection was associated with subsequent neutropenia, however, no statistically significant differences in outcomes were found between neutropenic and non-neutropenic patients in this small study. It remains to be determined in future studies if medication changes in response to neutropenia would impact patient outcomes.

Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group 2.0 - Back to Business

In December 2019, the Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group (ARLG) was awarded funding for another seven-year cycle to support a clinical research network on antibacterial resistance. ARLG 2.0 has three overarching research priorities: (1) infections caused by antibiotic resistant (AR) Gram-negative bacteria; (2) infections caused by AR Gram-positive bacteria, and (3) diagnostic tests to optimize use of antibiotics. To support the next generation of AR researchers, the ARLG offers three mentoring opportunities: the ARLG Fellowship, Early Stage Investigator Seed Grants, and the Trialists in Training Program. The purpose of this article is to update the scientific community on the progress made in the original funding period and to encourage submission of clinical research that addresses one or more of the research priority areas of ARLG 2.0.

RESTORE-IMI 1: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind Trial Comparing Efficacy and Safety of Imipenem/Relebactam vs Colistin Plus Imipenem in Patients With Imipenem-nonsusceptible Bacterial Infections

Background

The β-lactamase inhibitor relebactam can restore imipenem activity against imipenem-nonsusceptible gram-negative pathogens. We evaluated imipenem/relebactam for treating imipenem-nonsusceptible infections.

Methods

Randomized, controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial. Hospitalized patients with hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated pneumonia, complicated intraabdominal infection, or complicated urinary tract infection caused by imipenem-nonsusceptible (but colistin- and imipenem/relebactam-susceptible) pathogens were randomized 2:1 to 5–21 days imipenem/relebactam or colistin+imipenem. Primary endpoint: favorable overall response (defined by relevant endpoints for each infection type) in the modified microbiologic intent-to-treat (mMITT) population (qualifying baseline pathogen and ≥1 dose study treatment). Secondary endpoints: clinical response, all-cause mortality, and treatment-emergent nephrotoxicity. Safety analyses included patients with ≥1 dose study treatment.

Results

Thirty-one patients received imipenem/relebactam and 16 colistin+imipenem. Among mITT patients (n = 21 imipenem/relebactam, n = 10 colistin+imipenem), 29% had Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores >15, 23% had creatinine clearance <60 mL/min, and 35% were aged ≥65 years. Qualifying baseline pathogens: Pseudomonas aeruginosa (77%), Klebsiella spp. (16%), other Enterobacteriaceae (6%). Favorable overall response was observed in 71% imipenem/relebactam and 70% colistin+imipenem patients (90% confidence interval [CI] for difference, –27.5, 21.4), day 28 favorable clinical response in 71% and 40% (90% CI, 1.3, 51.5), and 28-day mortality in 10% and 30% (90% CI, –46.4, 6.7), respectively. Serious adverse events (AEs) occurred in 10% of imipenem/relebactam and 31% of colistin+imipenem patients, drug-related AEs in 16% and 31% (no drug-related deaths), and treatment-emergent nephrotoxicity in 10% and 56% (P = .002), respectively.

Conclusions

Imipenem/relebactam is an efficacious and well-tolerated treatment option for carbapenem-nonsusceptible infections.

Clinical Trials Registration

NCT02452047.

Drug Use and Postoperative Mortality Following Valve Surgery for Infective Endocarditis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Infective endocarditis (IE) often requires surgical intervention. An increasingly common cause of IE is injection drug use (IDU-IE). There is conflicting evidence on whether postoperative mortality differs between people with IDU-IE and people with IE from etiologies other than injection drug use (non-IDU-IE). In this manuscript, we compare short-term postoperative mortality in IDU-IE vs non-IDU-IE through systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

The review was conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Publication databases were queried for key terms included in articles up to September 2017. Randomized controlled trials, prospective cohorts, or retrospective cohorts that reported on 30-day mortality or in-hospital/operative mortality following valve surgery and that compared outcomes between IDU-IE and non-IDU-IE were included.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies with 1593 patients (n = 341 [21.4%] IDU-IE) were included in the meta-analysis. IDU-IE patients more frequently had tricuspid valve infection, Staphylococcus infection, and heart failure before surgery. Meta-analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in 30-day postsurgical mortality or in-hospital mortality between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite differing preoperative clinical characteristics, early postoperative mortality does not differ between IDU-IE and non-IDU-IE patients who undergo valve surgery. Future research on long-term outcomes following valve replacement is needed to identify opportunities for improved healthcare delivery with IDU-IE.

Bacterial antibiotic resistance development and mutagenesis following exposure to subinhibitory concentrations of fluoroquinolones in vitro: a systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Understanding social and scientific drivers of antibiotic resistance is critical to help preserve antibiotic efficacy. These drivers include exposure to subinhibitory antibiotic concentrations in the environment and clinic.

OBJECTIVES

To summarize and quantify the relationship between subinhibitory fluoroquinolone exposure and antibiotic resistance and mutagenesis to better understand resistance patterns and mechanisms.

METHODS

Following PRISMA guidelines, PubMed, Web of Science and Embase were searched for primary in vitro experimental studies on subinhibitory fluoroquinolone exposure and bacterial antibiotic resistance and mutagenesis, from earliest available dates through to 2018 without language limitation. A specifically developed non-weighted tool was used to assess risk of bias.

RESULTS

Evidence from 62 eligible studies showed that subinhibitory fluoroquinolone exposure results in increased resistance to the selecting fluoroquinolone. Most increases in MIC were low (median minimum of 3.7-fold and median maximum of 32-fold) and may not be considered clinically relevant. Mechanistically, resistance is partly explained by target mutations but also changes in drug efflux. Collaterally, resistance to other fluoroquinolones and unrelated antibiotic classes also develops. The mean ± SD quality score for all studies was 2.6 ± 1.8 with a range of 0 (highest score) to 7 (lowest score).

CONCLUSIONS

Low and moderate levels of resistance and efflux changes can create an opportunity for higher-level resistance or MDR. Future studies, to elucidate the genetic regulation of specific resistance mechanisms, and increased policies, including surveillance of low-level resistance changes or genomic surveillance of efflux pump genes and regulators, could serve as a predictor of MDR development.

The Infectious Diseases Society of America's 10 × '20 Initiative (10 New Systemic Antibacterial Agents US Food and Drug Administration Approved by 2020): Is 20 × '20 a Possibility?

BACKGROUND

Infections caused by antibiotic-resistant bacteria, including carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae, have increased in frequency, resulting in significant patient morbidity and mortality. The Infectious Diseases Society of America continues to propose legislative, regulatory, and funding solutions to address this escalating crisis. This report updates the status of development and approval of systemic antibiotics in the United States as of late 2018.

METHODS

We performed a review of the published literature and on-line clinical trials registry at www.clinicaltrials.gov to identify new systemically acting orally and/or intravenously administered antibiotic drug candidates in the development pipeline, as well as agents approved by the US Food and Drug Administration since 2012.

RESULTS

Since our 2013 pipeline status report, the number of new antibiotics annually approved for marketing in the United States has reversed its previous decline, likely influenced by new financial incentives and increased regulatory flexibility. Although our survey demonstrates progress in development of new antibacterial drugs that target infections caused by resistant bacterial pathogens, the majority of recently approved agents have been modifications of existing chemical classes of antibiotics, rather than new chemical classes. Furthermore, larger pharmaceutical companies continue to abandon the field, and smaller companies face financial difficulties as a consequence.

CONCLUSIONS

Unfortunately, if 20 × '20 is achieved due to efforts embarked upon in decades past, it could mark the apex of antibiotic drug development for years to come. Without increased regulatory, governmental, industry, and scientific support and collaboration, durable solutions to the clinical, regulatory, and economic problems posed by bacterial multidrug resistance will not be found.

A Randomized, Double-blind, Multicenter Trial Comparing Efficacy and Safety of Imipenem/Cilastatin/Relebactam Versus Piperacillin/Tazobactam in Adults With Hospital-acquired or Ventilator-associated Bacterial Pneumonia (RESTORE-IMI 2 Study)

Background

Imipenem combined with the β-lactamase inhibitor relebactam has broad antibacterial activity, including against carbapenem-resistant gram-negative pathogens. We evaluated efficacy and safety of imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam in treating hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP).

Methods

This was a randomized, controlled, double-blind phase 3 trial. Adults with HABP/VABP were randomized 1:1 to imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam 500 mg/500 mg/250 mg or piperacillin/tazobactam 4 g/500 mg, intravenously every 6 hours for 7–14 days. The primary endpoint was day 28 all-cause mortality in the modified intent-to-treat (MITT) population (patients who received study therapy, excluding those with only gram-positive cocci at baseline). The key secondary endpoint was clinical response 7–14 days after completing therapy in the MITT population.

Results

Of 537 randomized patients (from 113 hospitals in 27 countries), the MITT population comprised 264 imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam and 267 piperacillin/tazobactam patients; 48.6% had ventilated HABP/VABP, 47.5% APACHE II score ≥15, 24.7% moderate/severe renal impairment, 42.9% were ≥65 years old, and 66.1% were in the intensive care unit. The most common baseline pathogens were Klebsiella pneumoniae (25.6%) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (18.9%). Imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam was noninferior (P < .001) to piperacillin/tazobactam for both endpoints: day 28 all-cause mortality was 15.9% with imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam and 21.3% with piperacillin/tazobactam (difference, −5.3% [95% confidence interval {CI}, −11.9% to 1.2%]), and favorable clinical response at early follow-up was 61.0% and 55.8%, respectively (difference, 5.0% [95% CI, −3.2% to 13.2%]). Serious adverse events (AEs) occurred in 26.7% of imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam and 32.0% of piperacillin/tazobactam patients; AEs leading to treatment discontinuation in 5.6% and 8.2%, respectively; and drug-related AEs (none fatal) in 11.7% and 9.7%, respectively.

Conclusions

Imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam is an appropriate treatment option for gram-negative HABP/VABP, including in critically ill, high-risk patients.

Clinical Trials Registration

NCT02493764.

Good Studies Evaluate the Disease While Great Studies Evaluate the Patient: Development and Application of a Desirability of Outcome Ranking Endpoint for Staphylococcus aureus Bloodstream Infection

BACKGROUND

Desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) is an innovative approach in clinical trials to evaluate the global benefits and risks of an intervention. We developed and validated a DOOR endpoint for Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infection (BSI) through a survey to infectious diseases clinicians and secondary analysis of trial data.

METHODS

We administered a survey of 20 cases of S. aureus BSI, asking respondents to rank outcomes by global desirability. Correlations and percentage of pairwise agreement among rankings were estimated to inform development of a DOOR endpoint, which was applied to 2 prior S. aureus BSI trials. The probability that a patient randomly assigned to experimental treatment would have a better DOOR ranking than if assigned to control was estimated. Results were also analyzed using partial credit, which is analogous to scoring an academic test, assigning 100% to the most desirable outcome, 0% to the least, and "partial credit" to intermediate ranks.

RESULTS

Forty-two recipients (97%) completed the survey. The DOOR endpoint fitting these rankings (r = 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.67 to 0.94) incorporated survival plus cumulative occurrence of adverse events, cure, infectious complications, and ongoing symptoms. Tailored versions of this endpoint were applied to 2 S. aureus BSI trials, and both demonstrated no benefit of the experimental treatment using DOOR and partial credit analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Using S. aureus BSI as an exemplar, we developed a DOOR endpoint that can be used as a template for development of DOOR endpoints for other diseases. Future trials can incorporate DOOR to allow for global assessment of patient experience.

Trichodysplasia spinulosa: Case reports and review of literature

Trichodysplasia spinulosa (TS) is a rare skin condition caused by trichodysplasia spinulosa-associated polyomavirus (TSPyV). It affects immunosuppressed patients, and <50 cases have been reported. The majority of these cases are seen in solid organ transplant recipients. TS often poses a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge because of its rarity and resemblance with other skin conditions. Several forms of treatment are usually tried prior to establishing a definitive diagnosis. Oral valganciclovir and topical cidofovir have been found to give the best results and hence are the most commonly used agents once the diagnosis is established. Here, we present two cases with a review of literature of TS in solid organ transplant recipients, focusing on time to develop the condition post-transplant, immunosuppression regimen used, and treatment initiated both before and after a definitive diagnosis.

Considerations for Clinical Trials of Staphylococcus aureus Bloodstream Infection in Adults

Clinical trials for Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infections (SAB) are broadly grouped into 2 categories: registrational trials intended to support regulatory approval of antibiotics for the treatment of SAB and strategy trials intended to inform clinicians on the best treatment options for SAB among existing antibiotics. Both types of SAB trials are urgently needed but have been limited by cost, complexity, and regulatory uncertainty. Here, we review key SAB trial design considerations for investigators, sponsors, and regulators.

What's Hot in Clinical Infectious Diseases? 2019 IDWeek Summary

The year 2019 brought about a multitude of innovations in clinical infectious diseases. With the continued rise of antimicrobial resistance (AMR), advances in diagnostics and newly available antibiotics offer additional strategies for combating this threat, but the broken antibiotic market serves as an impediment to further developments. The IDSA and other stakeholders are working to create novel pull incentives to stabilize the pipeline. Ongoing needs include developing optimal stewardship practices, including by using narrow-spectrum antibiotics and shorter durations of therapy. In the area of solid organ transplantation, early data from transplanting Hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected organs are encouraging and the American Society of Transplantation (AST) released new guidelines addressing several key issues. Lastly, 2019 saw a resurgence in Measles emphasizing the importance of vaccination.

Evaluation of Renal Safety Between Imipenem/Relebactam and Colistin Plus Imipenem in Patients With Imipenem-Nonsusceptible Bacterial Infections in the Randomized, Phase 3 RESTORE-IMI 1 Study

Background

In the randomized controlled RESTORE-IMI 1 clinical trial (NCT02452047), imipenem/cilastatin (IMI) with relebactam (IMI/REL) was as effective as colistin plus IMI for the treatment of imipenem-nonsusceptible gram-negative infections. Differences in nephrotoxicity were observed between treatment arms. As there is no standard definition of nephrotoxicity used in clinical trials, we conducted analyses to further understand the renal safety profile of both treatments.

Methods

Nephrotoxicity was retrospectively evaluated using 2 acute kidney injury assessment criteria (Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes [KDIGO] and Risk, Injury, Failure, Loss, and End-stage Kidney Disease [RIFLE]). Additional outcomes included time to onset of protocol-defined nephrotoxicity and incidence of renal adverse events.

Results

Of 47 participants receiving treatment, 45 had sufficient data to assess nephrotoxicity (IMI/REL, n = 29; colistin plus IMI, n = 16). By KDIGO criteria, no participants in the IMI/REL but 31.3% in the colistin plus IMI group experienced stage 3 acute kidney injury. No IMI/REL-treated participants experienced renal failure by RIFLE criteria, vs 25.0% for colistin plus IMI. Overall, the time to onset of nephrotoxicity varied considerably (2–22 days). Fewer renal adverse events (12.9% vs 37.5%), including discontinuations due to drug-related renal adverse events (0% vs 12.5%), were observed in the IMI/REL group compared with the colistin plus IMI group, respectively.

Conclusions

Our analyses confirm the findings of a preplanned end point and provide further evidence that IMI/REL had a more favorable renal safety profile than colistin-based therapy in patients with serious, imipenem-nonsusceptible gram-negative bacterial infections.

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier

NCT02452047.

BAD BUGS, NO DRUGS 2002-2020: PROGRESS, CHALLENGES, AND CALL TO ACTION

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) requires a multifaceted response via a One Health approach. Antibiotics make procedures including joint replacement, transplantation, cancer chemotherapy, and premature newborn care possible. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that 2 million Americans are infected and >35,900 die from AMR, costing over $20 billion/year. Projections are that this will increase to 350 million cumulative AMR deaths by 2050. In its 2004 report entitled "Bad Bugs, No Drugs: As Antibiotic R&D Stagnates, A Public Health Crisis Brews," the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) raised alarm and proposed solutions. In the face of decreasing Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approvals and several program failures, scientific collaboration and regulatory innovation led to updated guidance for common, life-threatening infections. The IDSA and others worked to advance policies for discovery and development of drugs for the most resistant infections. Successes include legislation and public-private partnerships that provide push incentives. Need exists for pull incentives; several models are currently being explored.

1339. Results for the Supplemental Microbiological Modified Intent-to-Treat (SmMITT) Population of the RESTORE-IMI 1 Trial of Imipenem/Cilastatin/Relebactam (IMI/REL) vs. Imipenem/Cilastatin Plus Colistin (IMI+CST) in Patients with Imipenem-Nonsusceptible (NS) Bacterial Infections

Background

Clinical trials of new antibacterial agents in patients with carbapenem-resistant infections are critical but challenging to conduct. One challenge is identifying the study population by microbiological (micro) criteria; patients need to be identified locally to initiate effective treatment rapidly, but data standardization requires central laboratory confirmation. REL is a novel β-lactamase inhibitor that can restore imipenem activity against many imipenem-NS Gram-negative pathogens. Here we compare a supplemental analysis population based on local microbiology data (SmMITT eligibility) with the primary analysis population (mMITT) from the RESTORE-IMI 1 trial (NCT02452047) of IMI/REL vs. IMI+CST.

Methods

Randomized, active-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial enrolled adults with hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP), complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI), or complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI). Patients were mMITT-eligible if pathogens were imipenem-NS (but CST- and IMI/REL-susceptible) based on central laboratory minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC). SmMITT comprised mMITT plus all patients who met inclusion criteria only based on local laboratory MIC.

Results

The SmMITT population (n = 41 [28 IMI/REL; 13 IMI+CST]) comprised 31 from mMITT plus 10 based on local MIC; 12/41 (29%) had HABP/VABP, 8/41 (20%) cIAI, and 21/41 (51%) cUTI. The majority of differences in central vs. local MIC were 1–2 dilutions; similar numbers of patients were excluded from mMITT due to imipenem susceptibility (n = 5) or IMI/REL-NS (n = 4); 1 patient was CST-NS. Baseline characteristics, including infecting pathogens, were comparable in SmMITT and mMITT (SmMITT: 68% male; 46% ≥65 y; 24% APACHE II score &gt;15; 22% creatinine clearance &lt;60 mL/minute). Rates of efficacy outcomes (overall response, day 28 clinical response, day 28 mortality) were comparable between populations, except that response rates in patients with cIAI were higher in SmMITT (table).

Conclusion

Consistency of results was demonstrated across two analysis populations in a trial of resistant pathogens. This analysis provides results supportive of expected future clinical use of IMI/REL when treatment decisions will be made based on local laboratory results.

Disclosures

K. Kaye, Merck & Co., Inc.: Consultant and Research Contractor, Research grant. Melinta, Achaogen, Allergan: Consultant, Consulting fee. T. File, Bio Merieux, Curetis, Melinta, Merck, MotifBio, Nabriva, Paratek, Pfizer: Consultant, Consulting fee. H. W. Boucher, Merck & Co., Inc.: Scientific Advisor, Consulting fee. M. Brown, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary. A. Aggrey, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary. I. Khan, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary. H. K. Joeng, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary. R. Tipping, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary. J. Du, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary. K. Young, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary and Stock options. J. Butterton, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary and Stock. N. A. Kartsonis, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary and Stocks. A. Paschke, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee and Shareholder, Salary.

1951. Nephrotoxicity Associated With Imipenem/Cilastatin/Relebactam (IMI/REL) vs. Imipenem/Cilastatin Plus Colistin (IMI+CST) in Patients With Imipenem-Nonsusceptible (NS) Bacterial Infections

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Disclosures

Effect of Algorithm-Based Therapy vs Usual Care on Clinical Success and Serious Adverse Events in Patients with Staphylococcal Bacteremia: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

The appropriate duration of antibiotics for staphylococcal bacteremia is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To test whether an algorithm that defines treatment duration for staphylococcal bacteremia vs standard of care provides noninferior efficacy without increasing severe adverse events.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A randomized trial involving adults with staphylococcal bacteremia was conducted at 16 academic medical centers in the United States (n = 15) and Spain (n = 1) from April 2011 to March 2017. Patients were followed up for 42 days beyond end of therapy for those with Staphylococcus aureus and 28 days for those with coagulase-negative staphylococcal bacteremia. Eligible patients were 18 years or older and had 1 or more blood cultures positive for S aureus or coagulase-negative staphylococci. Patients were excluded if they had known or suspected complicated infection at the time of randomization.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomized to algorithm-based therapy (n = 255) or usual practice (n = 254). Diagnostic evaluation, antibiotic selection, and duration of therapy were predefined for the algorithm group, whereas clinicians caring for patients in the usual practice group had unrestricted choice of antibiotics, duration, and other aspects of clinical care.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Coprimary outcomes were (1) clinical success, as determined by a blinded adjudication committee and tested for noninferiority within a 15% margin; and (2) serious adverse event rates in the intention-to-treat population, tested for superiority. The prespecified secondary outcome measure, tested for superiority, was antibiotic days among per-protocol patients with simple or uncomplicated bacteremia.

RESULTS

Among the 509 patients randomized (mean age, 56.6 [SD, 16.8] years; 226 [44.4%] women), 480 (94.3%) completed the trial. Clinical success was documented in 209 of 255 patients assigned to algorithm-based therapy and 207 of 254 randomized to usual practice (82.0% vs 81.5%; difference, 0.5% [1-sided 97.5% CI, -6.2% to ∞]). Serious adverse events were reported in 32.5% of algorithm-based therapy patients and 28.3% of usual practice patients (difference, 4.2% [95% CI, -3.8% to 12.2%]). Among per-protocol patients with simple or uncomplicated bacteremia, mean duration of therapy was 4.4 days for algorithm-based therapy vs 6.2 days for usual practice (difference, -1.8 days [95% CI, -3.1 to -0.6]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among patients with staphylococcal bacteremia, the use of an algorithm to guide testing and treatment compared with usual care resulted in a noninferior rate of clinical success. Rates of serious adverse events were not significantly different, but interpretation is limited by wide confidence intervals. Further research is needed to assess the utility of the algorithm.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01191840.

Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections: Research Priorities, Accomplishments, and Future Directions of the Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group

Antimicrobial resistance in gram-positive bacteria remains a challenge in infectious diseases. The mission of the Gram-Positive Committee of the Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group (ARLG) is to advance knowledge in the prevention, management, and treatment of these challenging infections to improve patient outcomes. Our committee has prioritized projects involving methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) due to the scope of the medical threat posed by these pathogens. Approved ARLG projects involving gram-positive pathogens include (1) a pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics study to evaluate the impact of vancomycin dosing on patient outcome in MRSA bloodstream infection (BSI); (2) defining, testing, and validating innovative assessments of patient outcomes for clinical trials of MRSA-BSI; (3) testing new strategies for "step-down" antibiotic therapy for MRSA-BSI; (4) management of staphylococcal BSIs in neonatal intensive care units; and (5) defining the impact of VRE bacteremia and daptomycin susceptibility on patient outcomes. This article outlines accomplishments, priorities, and challenges for research of infections caused by gram-positive organisms.

Doing the Same with Less: A Randomized, Multinational, Open-Label, Adjudicator-Blinded Trial of an Algorithm vs. Standard of Care to Determine Treatment Duration for Staphylococcal Bacteremia

Background

The appropriate duration of antibiotics for staphylococcal bloodstream infection (BSI) is unknown. An algorithm to identify patients with staphylococcal BSI who can be safely treated with shorter courses of therapy would improve care and reduce total antibiotic use.

Methods

Adult patients with staphylococcal BSI were randomized to treatment based on algorithm-based therapy (ABT) or to standard of care (SOC). Co-primary outcomes were clinical success, as determined by a blinded Adjudication Committee, and serious adverse event (SAE) rates. The prespecified secondary outcome measure was antibiotic days by treatment group, among patients without complicated BSI. Prespecified durations of therapy in ABT were: S. aureus BSI (SAB): uncomplicated: 14 days; complicated: 4–6 weeks. Coagulase-negative staphylococci BSI (CoNSB): simple (1 positive blood culture) (0–3 days), uncomplicated (&gt;1 positive blood culture) (5 days), complicated (7–28 days). Outcomes were compared using intention-to-treat principles. The target sample size was 500 patients, to ensure 90% power for establishing noninferiority within a margin of 15%.

Results

Between April 2011 and March 2017, 509 adults with suspected staphylococcal BSI at 16 sites in the US and Spain were randomized to ABT (N = 255) or SOC (N = 254). There were 116 patients with SAB (23%) and 385 (76%) with CoNSB (Figure 1). Overall success rate in the ABT group was 82.0% vs. 81.5% in the SOC group, difference 0.5%, 95% CI −5.2% to 6.1%. SAEs were reported in 32.9% of ABT vs. 28.3% of SOC patients (OR 1.2, 95% CI 0.9 to 1.8). Among evaluable patients without complicated BSI, mean duration of therapy was 4.4 days in the ABT group vs. 6.4 days in the SOC group (difference −2.0 days, 95% CI −3.3 to −-0.7, P = 0.003). Among patients with uncomplicated SAB, treatment durations were similar (15.3 days in ABT vs. 16.3 days in SOC, difference −1 day, 95% CI −3.89 to 1.91, P = 0.497), whereas for uncomplicated CoNSB, duration was shorter in the ABT group (5.3 days in ABT vs. 8.4 days in SOC, difference −3 days, 95% CI −4.87 to −1.34, P &lt; 0.001).

Conclusion

The use of a treatment algorithm for staphylococcal BSI was associated with significant reductions in duration of antibiotic therapy in patients without complicated BSI, without significant differences in overall success or SAEs.

Disclosures

V. Fowler Jr., NIH: Investigator, Contract HHSN272200900023C

White Paper: Developing Antimicrobial Drugs for Resistant Pathogens, Narrow-Spectrum Indications, and Unmet Needs

Despite progress in antimicrobial drug development, a critical need persists for new, feasible pathways to develop antibacterial agents to treat people infected with drug-resistant bacteria. Infections due to resistant gram-negative bacilli continue to cause unacceptable morbidity and mortality rates. Antibacterial agents have been historically studied in noninferiority clinical trials that focus on a single site of infection (eg, complicated urinary tract infections, intra-abdominal infections), yet these designs may not be optimal, and often are not feasible, for study of infections caused by drug-resistant bacteria. Over the past several years, multiple stakeholders have worked to develop consensus regarding paths forward with a goal of facilitating timely conduct of antimicrobial development. Here we advocate for a novel and pragmatic approach and, toward this end, present feasible trial designs for antibacterial agents that could enable conduct of narrow-spectrum, organism-specific clinical trials and ultimately approval of critically needed new antibacterial agents.

Dalbavancin for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections

INTRODUCTION

Acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) have increased in incidence and severity. The involvement of resistant organisms, particularly methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, presents additional challenges. The lipoglycopeptide dalbavancin has a prolonged half-life, high protein binding, and excellent tissue levels which led to its development as a once-weekly treatment for ABSSSI. In the pivotal DISCOVER 1 and DISCOVER 2 trials, dalbavancin proved non-inferior to vancomycin followed by linezolid when used sequentially for ABSSSI, forming the basis for its recent approval in the US and Europe for ABSSSI.

AREAS COVERED

A literature search of published pharmacologic and clinical data was conducted to review the chemistry, pharmacodynamics, and pharmacokinetics of dalbavancin. We also discuss its development process, highlighting efficacy and safety data from pertinent clinical trials and the role it could play in the current clinical landscape.

EXPERT OPINION

DISCOVER 1 and DISCOVER 2 demonstrated dalbavancin's non-inferiority to vancomycin followed by linezolid for ABSSSI and confirmed its safety and tolerability. They were among the first trials to use new, early primary efficacy endpoints, and dalbavancin was among the first agents designated a Qualified Infectious Disease Product for expedited review. Dalbavancin may prove to be a valuable option for ABSSSI patients in whom conventional therapy is limited.